FrogFace wrote:so far i've got:
A B C D E F G H I (omit J) K L M N O P Q R S T U (omit W) V X (Y and Z are Greek incorporated into Latin)
therefore Latin has 24 total Letters opposed to English which has use of 26 letters.
if someone might happen to read this please correct me if you see something wrong with my Latin alphabet.
Chris Weimer wrote:It was a v written with a smoother style. They did that with every letter. They didn't have abcdefghijklmnopqrstxyz either. It didn't exist then.
Chris Weimer wrote:Gar, I don't know why everyone loved D's post. He was as ignorant and misleading on that as usual. The "u" wasn't attested. It was a v written with a smoother style. They did that with every letter. They didn't have abcdefghijklmnopqrstxyz either. It didn't exist then. The "u" doesn't have it's origins back then, as he implied. It was a v, just as they inscribed it, but written with sloppy handwriting. Go check for yourself the ancient papyri and see if you can find g. It ain't there. It's modern convention. It's all modern convention. "Historical precedent" - yeah right. Nothing typed is ever going to be close to historical precedent, since they didn't even have a press yet. How can you guys buy into that pseudo-intellectual bullshit?
cdm2003 wrote:Huh? "G" not in ancient papyri? Psuedo-intellectual? What?
FrogFace wrote:also i'm using Hodges's Harbrace english handbook in conjuntion with the grammical concepts and it works well with wheelocks so far. This gives a second source for insight hopefully leading into a solid understanding of rhetoric grammar.
Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot] and 3 guests